[SpA]ProtectMyBalls wrote:
To be fair though, it would have never translated that well into film. The best part of the book was the 5-6 pages between each chapter which was just subtext and back story; that's what made it for me, and you can't get that into a commercial film without making it even longer! I can see why Moore wanted his name off it, poor guy doesn't have much luck with his work being made into film adaptations. LEOG sucked! and V for Vendetta was pretty good, but still could have been alot more.
Nah, gotta disagree. Rorschach's speech to the doctor would have been supremely easy to put into the film. All they had to do is extend the scene with Rorschach at the child-murderer's house for about 2 minutes and have the voice-over play as he killed the dogs and so on. Completely simple and yet manages to put in the single most important part of the book.
This is the thing: anyone who can make a film of Watchmen and not realise that that speech is in fact the crux of the book really does not understand Watchmen. That one missing scene undermined all the hard work of the rest of the film. Its also not like it just got dropped to the cutting room floor. The final cut is insanely long so it would have added very little length wise to the film. The simple fact is that the director and screenplay writers thought it wasn't important and for that one decision they lose any respect I could have had for them.
When i said "To be fair though, it would have never translated that well into film." i meant the film in general, not that particular section

which was a shame they didn't include it, blame WB tbh ^^
The simple fact is that the director and screenplay writers thought it wasn't important and for that one decision they lose any respect I could have had for them.
Yeah, its Zack Synder, he is like the Bay of superhero films ^^
Also V for Vendetta wasn't bad?! You have read the book, right? You do know that they changed just about everything and utterly stripped all meaning from it?

Of course I have, and i totally agree (another reason Alan Moore kept his name off of it) but i really did enjoy Hugo Weaving's performance in it (getting emotion through a static mask is not an easy task) and some of the scenes were really pretty; which is why i don't hate the film, same with watchmen really, sure they both don't even compare to the source text at all, but there are elements i did enjoy, i was disappointed with watchmen not sticking to the original novel, all they had to do was stick to the text word for word , and they would have had one of the greatest film adaptations of all time; but sadly they didn't. Don't even get me started on how much they fucked up League of Extraordinary Gentleman lol, no wonder Moore hates hollywood. Can't believe Connery picked that as his last film over LOTR (i think that's what i read some where).
I'm terrified about what Snyder is going to do to The Dark Knight Returns
